I did a 4000 word dissertation on Rupert Smith's book, The Utility of Force. I took his arguments and applied them to the abilities of conventional armies to project force.

If you're interested in the academic title, it was:

“Interstate industrial war” versus “war amongst the people”. In what ways, according to Rupert Smith’s ‘paradigm shift’ of warfare, are conventional armies still a viable means with which to project force?

I would suggest finding a well respected argument, and criticise it. That way you can show that you can understand and respect arguments, but also form your own opinions, counter argue and defend your points.

Other than the question you've already posted, are there any specific areas you're really interested in?